I'm not sure I understand your suggestion for a new VENDORS-L list. It kind of sounds like you want to relegate discussion of non-IBM licensed products to a separate list and let you promote EGL on the established lists <smile> Wow, talk about an unlevel playing field! That would work for you?

I agree with you though; the lists need guidelines and moderation.

One problem with the new EGL list is the name. Who really cares about EGL (the language)? How many debates to you envision between EGL, RPG, COBOL, C, CL, etc.? IIRC, the language elements are a trivial part of the package. Isn't it really the package that matters (RDi and RBD)? I think it would be a good idea to rename the list to RDi & RBD to give it more scope and attract new members. Aside from that, I think it would also be appropriate to discuss RDi & RBD on Web400 because most folks will use it for Web application development.

Regarding opening up Midrange-L to EGL vs anything, I don't have a strong opinion. You're right, David should decide.


On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 11:09 AM , Joe Pluta wrote:

Nathan Andelin wrote:
EGL is not limited to web development.

Which begs the question, which list do you think it should be on?

My opinion?

Language comparisons in general belong here. Trying to determine the best tool for the job is the primary mandate of this list.

Now, if you can make a case that a specific comparison is web-related, you might want to say it should go on WEB400-L. If that decision is made, then all discussions of web-related topics should go there - that includes HTTP and web frameworks. JavaScript, PHP, Rails, should all go there. As should web security.

But if you decide to segregate that strongly, then I have a further suggestion. All commercial product discussion should be on a new VENDORS-L list. If a question is asked that deserves a vendor response, the vendor should respond with a brief comment including a URL to their website and a redirect to the VENDORS-L list. This new list would allows vendors to pitch their products without having to constantly put in caveats, while at the same time it makes it crystal clear to readers that posts may be from vendors.

And no, I don't consider IBM as a "vendor" in this sense. Any discussions of products licensed by IBM can remain on the Midrange-L list, barring their categorization in other lists. If David wants strict adherence to the web application issue, then EGL RUI, for example, would belong specifically in the WEB400 list as would Zend PHP (Zend is a strange case, but I'll give it the benefit of the doubt). RDi belongs on Midrange-L. RBD is a tougher case: JSF tooling discussions go to WEB400, but EGL for batch should remain in Midrange-L.

That's of course just my opinion, and it don't mean a hill of beans - this is clearly David's call, not ours.


This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailing list
To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives

This thread ...


Return to Archive home page | Return to MIDRANGE.COM home page